Thursday, December 13, 2012

The War on Mediocre Mexican Food

I recently stumbled across an editorial written to the non-stop source of frustrated giggles that is Fox News and thought I'd share it. http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/11/24/war-on-men/ You seriously need to read it. Rather than provide an in depth analysis or a sarcastic review of what was written I've decided to simply replace a few words and rephrase a few things to give you

The War on Mediocre Mexican Food
 
The battle amongst Mexican restaurants is alive and well. According to restaurant statistics published in numerous newspapers and magazines the number of Chipotle Grill restaurants has risen significantly in recent years. The number of businesses offering mediocre Mexican food has dropped.
Believe it or not Chipotle wants to provide its customers with healthy, sustainable, and tasty food. Trouble is, other Mexican restaurants don’t.
The so-called dearth of good Mexican restaurants not named Chipotle (read: places people like to eat at regularly) has been a hot subject in the eating world as of late. Much of the coverage has been in response to the fact that for the first time in a long time American consumers are choosing quality over poopiness. The problem? This dynamic has changed the dance between Chipotle and mediocre restaurants.
As an author of a bad advice blog and its intersection with pop culture I’ve spent several years eating food as it pertains to sustaining my ability to live. During this time I’ve eaten at hundreds, if not thousands of Mexican restaurants. And in doing so I’ve stumbled upon a subculture of restaurants that have told me, in implied terms, that they’re never going to improve their quality. When as I ask them why, the answer is always the same:
Successful Mexican restaurants aren’t trying to pass crap off as food anymore.
To say eating habits amongst consumers have changed dramatically is an understatement. Ever since people started thinking about how important taste actually is there has been a profound overhaul in the way certain restaurants feed customers. Crappy places haven’t changed that much – they have no one in management with a brain – but places like Chipotle have changed dramatically.
In a nutshell, Chipotle is really tasty. It’s also relatively healthy, though often affordable. That’s because it’s been created to view many previous food practices as gross, unhealthy, and in some cases unethical. Armed with this new business model Chipotle pushed its mediocre competitors off their pedestals (Chipotle had its own pedestal, but smart business sense made it want to reach more consumers) and climbed up to create something that consumers actually really liked.
Now the mediocre places have nowhere to go.
It is precisely this dynamic – Chipotle good/crap bad – that has destroyed the relationship with consumers. Yet somehow mediocre places are still to blame when someone doesn’t like their food. Heck, these places have been to blame since Chipotle first opened its doors all those years ago.
But what if the dearth of mediocre Mexican restaurants is – hold on to your seats – their own fault?
You’ll never hear this in places where people are capable of thinking critically. All the articles and books (and television programs for that matter) put places that focus on quality front and center, while the sucky guys sit in the back seat. But after years of browbeating the mediocre restaurant these places are tired. Tired of being told there’s something fundamentally wrong with their business models. Tired of being told that if people don’t like their food it’s probably because it doesn’t taste good.
Contrary to what people with taste buds say, the so called rise of Chipotle hasn’t threatened mediocre restaurants. It has pissed them off. It has so undermined their ability to recognize consumer needs while exhibiting corporate social responsibility. Mediocre restaurants want to squash Chipotle, not learn from it, adapt, and compete with it.  They want to make consumers eat mounds of mass produced garbage that isn’t all that tasty – it’s in their DNA. But competitive markets and ensuing consumer behavior, all driven by companies like Chipotle, won’t let them.
It’s all so unfortunate, for Chipotle, not the other guys. The other guys can watch their businesses fail because they’re poorly run, which is just wrong.
It’s Chipotle and its customers who lose. Not only are they saddled with the consequences of healthy, sustainable food, by dismissing bad food they’re forever seeking, but never finding a less satisfying, shorter life. The fact is Chipotle needs the mediocre, possibly unethical business practices of some of the other Mexican restaurants of the world in order to have the worse life it clearly seeks.
So, if mediocre Mexican restaurants are going out of business Chipotle needs to look itself in the mirror and ask itself what role it has had to play in this.
Fortunately there is good news: Chipotle has the power to turn this around. All it has to do is shift towards producing a less healthy, less delicious product and thereby let its incompetent competitors survive.
If it does, and downgrades to a worse business model, more mediocre restaurants will come out of the woodwork.
...
 
This thinking makes total sense right? Women and Chipotle have made everyone's lives worse in their efforts to be better and reach their full potential. Everyone else who is unwilling to improve now has to suffer.
 
Tragic. Truly, heartbreakingly, hungrily tragic.
 


Wednesday, October 24, 2012

Option 21: Gossipmongering

Did you know that candidate X did so and so terrible things in his youth? Did you know that candidate Y supported that one insidious program while filling that one position? Odds are that hearing these questions has immediately brought relevant "facts" to your mind about one political candidate or another. Such information has likely influenced your perceptions, and subsequently your statements and actions. Unfortunately for you, a lot of that information is probably contextually irrelevant to the political argument and/or false.

Most of this negative information was probably disseminated to you through a combination of political super-PACs and editorialists (bloggers, TV personalities, etc.) - entities that stand to benefit greatly from attracting and retaining your attention while having no fear of suffering negative consequences for publishing falsehoods.  Editorialists and super-PACs are so influential because of a psychological phenomenon where we 1) have an easy time noticing and remembering inflammatory information, 2) have a hard time remembering more boring data that proves the exciting stuff is false, and 3) adjust our behaviors accordingly. To make it worse, most of us also feel little to no need to seek out additional information, especially if it conflicts with the idea we've already anchored to. The result? Look at Facebook and consider how much douchebagging your friends (and maybe you) have engaged in during this election cycle.

So, if political misinformation can wreak such havoc, despite the fact that it is relatively easy for us to find information that is factually correct and contextually relevant, imagine the problems that emerge when inaccurate information about people in our social circles comes out - where it is significantly more difficult for us to find out what's really going on.

Option 21: Gossipmongering

Gossipmongering is the social act of sharing information with others that due to either lack of context or blatant falsehood serves to place a mutually-known person in a negative light. To illustrate:
At first glance these interactions seem fairly normal. Red gave Purple information that helped her to avoid an unpleasant experience. However, the information lacked both context and data. Contextually Red earns a lot more money than Blue and buys things without thinking about it, whereas Blue has to be selective. Data-wise Blue only took an extra 3.5 minutes per store. Interestingly enough, Purple is on a budget similar to Blue's, and would likely have a better time shopping with Blue than with Red. Fortunately Red's gossipmongering has altered Purple's perceptions of Blue and created a social rift that didn't previously exist. *gleeful clapping* 

Can this rift be repaired? Yes. However, negative information is psychologically quite sticky. Once we hear it we have a very hard time letting it go. So, while Purple may eventually decide to go shopping with Blue the negative information passed on by Red is probably going to be constantly lingering in her thoughts, thereby resulting in a relatively permanent adjustment in behavior and a subsequent reduction in the quality of the relationship.

This is just one example of gossipmongering, of which there are two types: calculated and habitual. Habitual gossipmongering is more common and is usually rooted  in the need to vent and/or share an exciting story. While more innocent in nature it still causes fluxations in the social dynamic and if done often enough can create some real problems. For instance, I have a friend who once dated a girl who loved, and I mean LOVED to complain to him about her friends. Day in and day out she would tell him one negative story after another. The result? He didn't like her friends. Ironically, she had a real problem with that. 

That's the hazard of habitual gossipmongering. Those who frequently indulge in gossip don't do it out of some sadistic need for a social powergrab, but more out of a combination of vanity, impatience, insecurity, and lack of self control. They feel like they're just venting, that what they're saying doesn't mean anything, but what they fail to realize is that all the negative information they share (even if true) becomes embedded in the perceptions of others and ultimately causes them to act differently towards those who have been gossiped about. 

Calculated gossipmongering on the other hand is significantly more toolish and is of course far superior. Tools will use gossipmongering as a way of increasing their own social capital (the amount of influence you carry) while simultaneously reducing that of others. Calculated gossipmongering is done incessantly so as to ensure the maximum yield for the tool. 

To illustrate: Imagine that you just started a job. While training and working you find that you and your supervisor Janet are getting along great. Michael, a coworker, sees this and feels threatened. To ensure he retains, and maybe increases his social capital he informs you that Janet has been telling other employees she worries you are a liability and doesn't think you are fit for the job (what Janet actually said was that she was worried you would be overwhelmed and wanted to make sure you acclimated alright). He finishes this bit of gossipmongering by saying, "But don't worry, I think you're solid. I won't let Janet put you down if I can help it." In one fell swoop Michael has managed to cause you to shift all your trust away from Janet and towards him. The result? You begin acting differently towards her, fracture that relationship, and become dependent on Michael. Awesome, no? If you haven't done this you need to try it. It will change your life. 

However, while gossipmongering, habitual or calculated, is a strong candidate for BEST THING EVER it does come with a downside: karma. Individuals who indulge in it too much find that, over time, people figure out what's going on and decide to distance themselves from the gossipmongerer. They realize they've been used, gossiped about, and have missed out on what otherwise could have been meaningful relationships with other people due to all the misinformation produced by the gossipmongerer. Once this realization takes place the gossipmongerer goes from having the most social capital to the least, and often has no choice but to leave that social circle and enter a new one. This is why they often appear to have lots of friends, but at the same time are never rooted in one group for very long.

So what does this have to do with dating and marriage? Quite a bit. You can become a gossipmongerer yourself and tear everyone else down in your quest to find your perfect mate, or you can find someone who has done just that to find you. After all, what is more romantic and uplifting than filling other people with misleading, inflammatory information that makes them ignorant, angry, hateful, and ultimately lonely and unsatisfied? Nothing. Just ask the guys behind the super-PACs. 



Saturday, September 22, 2012

What Makes a Creep? Pt. 3

How we can turn other people into creeps is without a doubt an essential subject of study when it comes to dating and human interaction in general. That said, we must also strive to understand how we can become creeps ourselves. 

What Makes a Creep? Pt. 3 - How to Become a Creep

Rather than present a lengthy, written explanation for this process I'd like for us to go on a visual journey. Below are ten points, in random order, of steps you should take to cement yourself in someone's life as a creep.

 1. Ignore personal bubbles.


 2. Disregard the concept of oral hygiene.

Bad breath makes everyone easier to talk to.
 3. Do a lot of Facebook stalking.

Isn't it funny how clicking on one picture turns into five hundred?
4. Understand "no" as "please try again in a day or two."

Another reason motivational posters are a problem.

5. "God said we have to be together!"

If you hear this you need to summon Kevin Costner and Morgan Freeman to burst through the door to rescue you.
.

6. Always button your shirt to the very top (hipsters are excused).

OK
Not OK
7. "Randomly" be in the neighborhood. All. The. Time.


 8. Have pictures of the object of your affection saved on your phone and computer.
Did anyone else find it disconcerting that this version of Spider-man had saved a bunch of pictures of Mary Jane on his PC?



 9. Watch them in their sleep.

I'm sorry, it was too easy.
10. Stare. A lot.

Again, too easy.







Saturday, September 15, 2012

What Makes a Creep? Pt. 2 (Phases 4 and 5)

What Makes a Creep?
Pt. 2 
Phases 4-5

Be sure to read Part 1 and Part 2 (Phases 1-3) before reading further. 

Most of us stop Feeding the Creep at phase three. Someone, or something, manages to intervene and end the circus that has emerged from us taking advantage of someone's interest in us. However, sometimes the ridiculousness continues and proceeds on to two final superduperawesome phases.

Phase IV - Unexpected Cold Shoulder

After engaging in sufficient stringing alonging we get to the point where the doting and attention giving is just too much. We start feeling guilty, annoyed, creeped out, or all three and as a result start doing all the things we probably should have done in Phase II. We start taking forever to text back. We make up excuses about why we can no longer hang out on Friday. We delete the comments they make on our Facebook pages. Alas, the sap who's fallen for us shockingly can't take a hint and continues to try to woo us despite the fact that we've tried to make things clear... kind of.

Once its degenerated to this point we can either do what we should have done in Phase III (be honest with them) or we can revert to a more awesome approach: the cold shoulder. Most of us go with go with the latter option. Suddenly and without warning we more or less cut the person off (this isn't a huge deal if done in Phase II since a relationship hasn't really been established, but if done at this stage of the relationship its rather unpleasant). No specific action has precipitated our cold shouldering, we've just decided "its time." Lacking explanation, we suddenly start treating someone who has devoted valuable hours of his/her life to us (a devotion we perpetuated) like we barely know them.

Unfortunately the cold shoulder doesn't work very well at this point because its so inconsistent with our previous behavior. The poor fool we may now have started referring to as "The Creep" has no idea what is going on and is probably alternating between making excuses for why we're ignoring him/her and realizing he/she's been used and hating him/herself for it.

To make matters worse a lot of people who give the cold shoulder chicken out part way through. They start to feel bad about causing someone pain so they reach out. They think they're being nice by helping a sad creature to feel better about himself. Only then they feel guilty/annoyed/creeped out again and go back to the could shoulder. This cycle is often repeated several times, which is super fun for everyone involved.

Phase V - Smear Campaign

After the cold shoulder has been applied one of three things happens:

1) The Creep moves on in life but has some emotional scars, a dearth of self confidence, and a gaping whole in her social circle because too much of it was centered on us up to this point.

or

2) The Creep decides to make one final push in spite of the cold shoulder and candidly bears his/her soul knowing that rejection is coming, but desperately wanting to hear it from us officially rather than having to deal with the silent treatment.

or

3) The Creep never really processed our cold shoulder and continues to persist in her efforts to win our us over.

If two or three happens we'll be forced to finally just tell the person we aren't interested and that he/she needs to leave us alone. However, we avoid this talk, put it off at all costs, and spend a lot of time sharing the story of how creepy this person is with pretty much everyone we know. Rather than, you know, dealing with the problem we created.

Eventually push comes to shove and we FINALLY have the talk. Afterwards we heroically return to our friends, tell them all the details and say, "You know, I just realized I had to tell it to him straight." "I didn't want to lead her on," we elaborate. "I just felt bad at the idea of having someone pursue something that could never happen," we conclude, and all throughout our carefully crafted narrative we find ourselves looking like victims and heroes while The Creep comes off as well, a creep.

The Result

There are two strongly contrasting outcomes from these kinds of interactions. For us, the innocent victims, we generally walk away feeling great about life. We have a crazy story to tell (who doesn't love those?) and a lot of extra self-esteem thanks to all the positive attention we got throughout the entire experience.

The Creep on the other hand, a monster we fed and created, walks away from the ordeal less of a person than when he/she started. Not only has The Creep begun to identify with the name given him/her, but has literally felt his/her self-image be shattered and remolded into something far worse. We may have thought our stories would stay within our circle of friends, but who were we kidding? Of course everyone started treating The Creep differently, and of course he/she started noticing little whispers here and there.

When all is said and done we look back on the experience of Feeding the Creep and think we look like this:


But we actually look like this:


Which begs the question: which creep have we been feeding?

Friday, August 17, 2012

What Makes a Creep? Pt. 2 (Phases 1-3)

Be sure to have read Part 1 before reading this, shockingly named, Part 2.

On some occasions a creep enters our lives through no fault of our own. We've done  every possible thing to avoid the creepers and yet, despite our best efforts, a creep has targeted us and we have the challenge of figuring out how to get rid of him/her. Many of you are now saying, "That's totally what happened to me!" But before you go patting yourself on the back for being the innocent and subsequently heroic victim of a creep please consider the following:

What Makes a Creep?
Pt. 2 - Feed the Creep
Phases 1-3

While many creeps emerge organically from the social environment I would like to argue that some of them are actually created by us. Rather than have a creep stumble into our lives we actually take a previously (relatively) normal person and through a process of both action and inaction turn that person into a creep. Something they never would have become if it weren't for us. This process, what I call "Feeding the Creep" has five phases (the first three will be explored here, the final two in a following post). 

Phase I - I'm Flattered

Everyone likes to be liked. More often than not discovering that someone finds us attractive gives us an ego boost. Unless the person looks like this



Generally speaking (with exceptions like that mentioned above), even if there is no way we would enter a relationship with the person crushing on us we still feel flattered. As a result we likely won't do anything to indicate our lack of interest, thereby ensuring a certain degree of fawning continues. 

Phase II - Misleading Reciprocation

Inevitably the person liking us will start making some tentative pokes at getting more of our attention. Texts, Facebook chats, Skyping, invitations to get togethers, and dates all take place with the primary intent of getting us to reciprocate some of the attention that is being so generously given to us. Once we've been given enough attention we reach a decision point. At this point there are three different thresholds that determine the course of action we take. 







Should a person fall under Threshold 1 odds are we'll be pretty dismissive of any attempts at getting our attention. This is where the 1/(Attractiveness X Social Skills) = Perceived Creepability comes in. Guys and girls in Threshold 1 are usually gone pretty quickly. If a person falls under Threshold 3 we get excited and do our darndest to make sure things work out well. The real problems emerge when someone falls under Threshold 2. 

The poor fools falling under Threshold 2 are fifth stringers on our backburner lists. In regards to them we secretly tell ourselves things like, "Maybe I'll go for him/her if I gain too much weight or if I go X amount of time without a relationship." We don't like them romantically, but we do like the little things they do to remind us of our awesomeness and we reciprocate as much as possible without going so far as to actually make any kind of emotional commitment. The attention is too great, too toolishly appealing for us to cut it off. So instead we feed it knowing it will never go anywhere. 

Phase III - Too Selfish to Grow a Backbone

Think about a time where you liked someone, but weren't sure how he/she felt. Did reciprocation from them, however small, not make your day? Did you not feel your emotional investment was validated every time you got a text or an event invite? Moments like these are great and make you feel giggly and excited right? These feelings also probably caused you to be a bit bolder in pursuing the affections of the person you liked, no? Well, NEWSFLASH, people on the backburner list experience those exact same things when we carelessly romp through Phase II! That's right, our little bit of self indulgence has falsely put someone on cloud nine.

Usually we realize when things have gotten to this point, when we've let things slide for too long, when its time for us to put a stop to the ridiculousness. We know we need to do something, but we're scared to. "I don't want to be mean," we say, really meaning, "my social discomfort at having to finally be open and honest is just not worth it. I'd rather string them along towards an inevitable emotional collapse while somewhat guiltily reaping the benefits of all this loving attention."

Not sure where this is going? Well, stay tuned for phases 4 and 5 and try not to Feed the Creep!


Thursday, August 16, 2012

What Makes a Creep? Pt. 1

To better set the mood please go to the following link and play the beautiful cover of Radiohead's Creep while you read this. Trust me, it will be totally worth it. http://soundcloud.com/wallofsound/scala-kolacny-brothers-creep

What Makes a Creep?
Pt. 1

I recognize that this blog is devoted to examining awesomely problematic relationships in the world of tools (hence the blog's name) but after reading this (which you REALLY need to read) I couldn't help but deviate a bit and discuss the subject of creepiness. The tricky part about examining creepiness is that the concept in and of itself is highly subjective. What makes someone creepy? If a guy watches a girl sleep at night does she find that endearing? Or does it make her call the cops? I was always under the assumption that this kind of behavior fell under the NOT OK category, and then Stephanie Meyer and millions of women proved me wrong. 

So, while specific behaviors are more difficult to label as creepy there are a few things we can examine in an effort to explain the phenomenon of being creepy. Today, in part one I want to present a formula/equation to you that will serve as the foundation for our analysis. However, before I do that I want to run you through a little mental exercise. To begin I want you to imagine a creepy guy. The creepy guy cannot be an actual person or an already existing fictional character. He needs to be purely the creation of your mind. Seriously, take 30 seconds to just sit there and think about it before scrolling down. 

Now, does he look like....
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
_
_
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
this?

or this?
or this?



Of course not! Who imagines that the creepy guy is handsome and charismatic?! That's not to say that a good looking man can't be creepy, just that we don't expect it. 

To simplify the psychological phenomenon behind what you just experienced here is the equation I previously mentioned. 

1/(Attractiveness X Social Skills) = Perceived Creepability

The lower either factor A or S (or both) the higher the level of creepability. Simply put, good looking people with strong social skills will rarely, if ever, be labeled as creeps the first time they meet someone. On the other hand, people lacking in either department are more likely to be considered creepy. 

To provide a real life example: I once had a friend named "Adam" who scored fairly low on attractiveness and was somewhat lacking in the social skills department. The result was that women were often terrified to speak to him. Time and time again I watched him approach women to introduce himself and saw the women get the "Gah! Who is this weirdo and why is he talking to me?!" look on their faces. 

Was this completely unfair? Absolutely. Does it change the fact that it happened and that it will likely continue? Probably not. 

This equation of 1/(AxS)=P is a fascinating one because 1) it differs from person to person (not everything is creepy to everyone) and 2) it causes us to question both how we perceive others as well as how we handle our interactions with them. On one hand it tells us we shouldn't be so judgmental. On the other it also serves as a reminder that we ourselves could very possibly fall onto the creepy list at any time; and once you end up on the creepy list YOU DO NOT GET OFF THE CREEPY LIST. You could tutor homeless kids, write the next great American novel, and find the cure for cancer ALL AT THE SAME TIME and it still wouldn't do you any good. You'd still be a creep. Should this happen to you just sing "Creep" to yourself a few times, become a vampire, and move on. Somewhere out there is a Bella who will view you as her very own Jon Hamm. 

Stay tuned for Part 2!




Wednesday, August 1, 2012

Option 20: If Everyone Says It's a Bad Idea...Go For It!

There's been a recent trend in the social sciences to examine what is called collective intelligence and its effectiveness in comparison to individual intelligence. While studies are still ongoing and much more needs to be researched it has been found that in many instances groups of people as a whole are smarter and know more than single individuals. Some have even gone so far as to argue (with some quantified research) that group decision making, not just knowledge, is superior to that of the individual. James Surowiecki, a columnist for the New Yorker and former contributing editor to Fortune, even went so far as to write an entire book called The Widsom of Crowds supporting this argument. So what does this mean for us in our quest to marry tools? It means that

Option 20: If Everyone Says It's a Bad Idea... Go For It!

I'm pretty sure all of us have experienced a time where someone we cared about was in a relationship with a tool that had EPIC FAIL written all over it. Situations like this are tough because you don't know when you're finally going to have to step up to the True Friend Plate and say, "Hey, you really don't want to date that guy. He's a tool. Seriously, I read this blog all about them, and he. Is. A. Tool."

When the relationship first starts and you're not quite sure how bad it is you tell yourself that its just you, that maybe he/she's great, but just doesn't click with you, that you're happy your friend has found someone, so you don't say anything. But then you start to notice some major red flags, like say, a refusal to eat at Chipotle. Still, you don't dare to say anything to your friend dating this person, and instead indulge in some protective gossip. You mention your observations and concerns to some mutual friends and they affirm what you've already suspected. The person you love is dating a tool! And its not just you, everyone thinks so! 

Notwithstanding this stunning revelation you still don't say anything directly to your friend (nor does anyone else), you just keep talking about the problem behind his/her back, hoping it will solve itself. Still, nothing changes and eventually the relationship gets bad enough that you make poor attempts at subtly saving your friend. You do things like set up get togethers without his/her partner, send them "random links" to news articles about relationships and dating, or even try introducing potential new dating partners to them (you know its gotten really bad when you set them up with people you wanted).

None of this works of course and eventually the tension builds to the point where you just can't take it anymore. You, by yourself or with a group, step up to the True Friend Plate and sit your friend down for a nice little Come to Jesus Talk. You lay out the problems you've seen, your love for them, and even provide specific examples to justify your concerns. Everything seems to be going well while you share your thoughts, and then this happens:


Once your friend pulls an Ariel its over, there's nothing you can do, he/she's chosen the tool over you, everyone else, Chipotle, and even happiness. This is also, not coincidentally how things are supposed to go. 

People who ignore the better judgement of everyone else are demonstrating unprecedented levels of wisdom. They are noting that A) groups are usually more correct then individuals, B) those trying to pry them away from the tool are not subject to any kind of romantic blindness, and that C) the interventionists are trying to stop the relationship out of a deep sense of love rather than out of selfishness. In recognizing these things it is easier for them to walk away from people who care about them and bask in the glory of the tool they are dating. 

The fact of the matter is that if everyone says something is a bad idea they're probably right, which provides you with every justification in going for it. This is why I recommend cocaine. Remember, we don't want happy, fulfilling relationships. Nor do we want to be able to share the joy stemming from those relationships with our friends and family. We, in our quest to marry tools, want problematic relationships that drain the joy from our souls and sever our ties with everyone else we care about. This is why a girl I knew eloped with a guy who had (among other awesome things) gone to jail after trying to buy stuff at a local Wal-Mart using money he had stolen from said Wal-Mart the day before. #winning

On the flip side if you are dating someone who is largely met with approval you need to drop them. Now. Science may try to tell you otherwise, but the fact of the matter is that the group is wrong. That's right, you know more than EVERYONE ELSE. So pick up your fins, go sell your voice to an evil sea witch with tentacles, and get to work because you've got a tool to marry.